Picture Style and RAW

If you shoot exclusively RAW I'd assumed that the Picture Style settings have

no effect on the recorded image, that Picture Style only affected jpeg shots

and the image as shown in camera's LCD monitor. Is this correct?

Yes

And does this still apply if you use Canon's own RAW conversion software as opposed to say the Aperture or Phase One RAW converters?

I think : it's only Canon's conversion software that can recognize the Picture Style settings in

a RAW and can be set to use those as starting points for the conversion. Other converters

don't see that tag.

As far as I know the only things affecting the RAW image are the shutter speed, ISO setting, whether or not Highlight Priority mode is enabled and whether the long exposure NR second exposure function is in operation.

 

The RAW file itself is not affected by any adjustments of sharpness, color, contrast, picture style, white balance etc., though those settings are recorded and can be used by DPP as default conversion parameters.

Thanks Andy, that would explain something. I was trying to see if my new 1Ds MkIII delivered any better results than my 5D (my previous 1Ds mkII didn't - you'd think I'd learn!).

 

What I wasn't prepared for was that, using the latest version of Canon's RAW converter to take advantage of the new optical correction facilities, the 5D seemed considerably crisper than the 1Ds MkIII. Playing around trying to figure out why, I realised that Picture Styles on the 5D was set with high sharpening, where as it was set at 0 on the 1Ds MkIII.

 

I'll try a comparison again with identical Picture Style settings and also use a third party RAW converter.

Okay, maybe I'm confused then, about the following - is there not facility for in-camera sharpening for RAW files? Posts above seem to suggest the answer is 'no', but, unless I don't understand something, I thought several regular contributors who shoot RAW talk often about in-camera sharpening?

Sharpness setting do not affect the RAW file. The RAW file is the data straight from the sensor electronics (so it includes the gain stage that controls ISO). It's the data file as it is before any software processing occurs.

"Okay, maybe I'm confused then, about the following - is there not facility for in-camera sharpening for RAW files? Posts above seem to suggest the answer is 'no', but, unless I don't understand something, I thought several regular contributors who shoot RAW talk often about in-camera sharpening?"

 

The in-camera sharpening doesn't affect the RAW data, but it DOES affect the JPEG image that the camera displays on it's rear screen. The histogram is also derived from the camera-converted JPEG.

 

When you think about it, this is the way it should be - correct sharpening ALWAYS involves multiple passes - if RAW data was subject to in-camera sharpening then it would be a case of "1 size trying to fit all", and additional sharpening would have to be done on an image that had already beed sharpened.

Somehow I thought I read somewhere that during the writing (raw data to the card) there is some sort of sharpening applied. But it's independant to any style setting.

"Somehow I thought I read somewhere that during the writing (raw data to the card) there is some sort of sharpening applied. But it's independant to any style setting."

 

No.

 

At the stage where the capture is written to a card it isn't even an image - it's effectively 3 greyscale images (R, G, and B). The anti-aliasing filter and demosaicing process introduce unsharpness when has been countered to a degree automatically by a couple of versions of ACR, but they were damn near hung, drawn, and quartered for it.

"The RAW file itself is not affected by any adjustments of sharpness, color, contrast, picture style, white balance etc., though those settings are recorded and can be used by DPP as default conversion parameters."

 

I think you're right. Although even if you shoot only in RAW the picture style definitely affects the image as displayed on the camera's own monitor, and from what (little) experience I've had so far with the latest version of DPP it seems very easy to let RAW conversion default to the picture style nominated in the camera.

Gary, you might want to backtrack a little, do a re-set of software and camera settings and study a bit more. I'm not saying this to be condescending, but your comment about not seeing any difference in RAW between your 5D and 1Ds2 tells me you're missing something fundamental - in setup or understanding. At 100%, the 1Ds2 RAW's are clearly superior to the 5D's at 100%, and yes, the 1Ds3's are better than the Ds2 RAWS - especially with the highlight priority enabled. If you're not seeing a distinct quality jump from 5D to 1Ds2, you've maxed out your monitor resolution, software res, or some other ability to view issue.

 

When you're able to see those differences, you'll be in a better place to objectively evaluate your RAW images. Turn noise reduction "Off" on both bodies, and you will see differences in the RAWs. Then, the further "tweaking" of images will be more clearly visible to you and you can make some decisions based upon what you're seeing.

Btw, I should have clarified, you'll "see" the differences on your monitor - not the LCD. The on camera LCD's are so small and low res that RAW's from all Canon bodies look pretty much the same. But you will see a difference when you view the images on a competent monitor.

Christopher, thanks for your reply. I've retaken a side by side shot with the 5D and with

the 1Ds MkIII, tripod mounted, f8 same lens, etc, in fact all the all the usual courtesies!

 

There's certainly an additional touch of resolution with the 1Ds MkIII, whether or not it's

actually of any significance in practical photography (indeed whether or not it's even

present with hand-held, practical photography) I'm not so sure.

 

However, that's a subjective judgement, and each to his own. Personally I think the 1Ds

MkIII falls between two stools, it's not quite up to the level of my Phase One P45+ when

used tripod mounted, but it delivers nugatory benefits over the 5D when used hand held.

But hey, that's my opinion and I'm happy if others take a different view.

 

Not so subjective is the effect of DPP (version 3.2.0.6, which i understand is the latest

version). I tried taking the same shot with the 1Ds MkIII set to RAW only on both

occasions, but with radically different picture styles set, then converted them to TIFF using

DPP with both DPP's optical correction facility used, and then not used.

 

In all cases the TIFF files showed clear differences due to picture styles. I'll try again using

Aperture or Capture One as the RAW converter and see what happens then.